Strategies for Student Engagement: Reflections from the Coalface.

Strategies for Student Engagement:Reflections from the Coalface

Bizzell, P. (1986) What happens when basic writers come to college, College Composition and Communications, Vol.37, No.3, pp.294-301.

Brabazon, T. (ed.) (2002) Digital Hemlock: Internet Education and the Position of Teaching, UNSW Press, Sydney.

Candy, P., Crebert, G. & O’Leary, J. (1994). Developing lifelong learners through undergraduate education. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service

Hillman, K. (2005) The First Year Experience: The Transition from Secondary School to University and TAFE in Australia, Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth Research Report No.40, Australian Council for Educational Research, Melbourne.

Krause, K., Hartley, R., James, R. and McInnis, C. (2005) The First Year Experience in Australian Universities: Findings from a Decade of National Studies, Higher Education Innovations Programme, Department of Education, Science and Training, Canberra.

Munns, G. and Martin, A. (2005) It’s all about MeE: A Motivation and Engagement Framework. Paper presented at AARE conference, 4-5 July, James Cook University, Cairns. Available online: http://www.aare.edu.au/05pap/mun05400.pdf

Peel, M. (2000). ‘Nobody cares’: the challenge of isolation in school to university transition . Journal of Institutional Research, 9(1), pp. 22-34.

Teese, R., Polesel, J. & Mason, K. (2004). The Destination of School Leavers in Victoria: Report of the 2003 On Track project. Centre for Post-compulsory Education and Lifelong Learning: University of Melbourne. Retrieved June 2005 from http//www.llen.vic.gov.au/llen/ontrack/index.htm

Tinto, V. (2000). Learning better together: The impact of learning communities on student success in higher education. Journal of Institutional Research, 9(1), pp. 48-53.

The Gippsland campus• Situated about 150km to the East of the city of Melbourne, Victoria

• As a regional campus, a focus of program development has been to meet the needs of the local community - 75% of domestic undergraduate students at the campus are from the local area

• Very depressed economy in the late 1980s and early 90s. As a result, the 15-19 year old population in Gippsland is declining at a much more rapid rate than the rest of Australia.

• Education has historically not been a high priority in the region. Only 29% have completed Year 12 qualifications compared to 45% across Victoria. Among the work force, only 9% have Bachelor degrees compared with 16% Victoria wide

• Only 31% of the regions Year 12 completers expect to go to University compared to 40% across the State

• It is a lower socio-economic region with 34% of households earning less than $600 per week compared with 26% across State.

• The Campus has about 2,000 on campus students, 250 international students from 30 countries, and approximately 5000 off campus students.

Student Profiles• Modest levels of Secondary School achievement• Local to the regional campus• Disengaged learners• Pragmatic learners• Disrupted learners• Disillusioned or disheartened• Uncertain about the direction of their education

• First in family at university• Motivated but lacking the necessary skills &

attitudes

Student Profile

In daily life as well as mass education, they [students] are exposed variously to racism, sexism, homophobia, fascination with the rich and powerful, excessive consumerism, the generation gap, heroic militarism, self-reliant individualism, and a dependent relationship to authority. In this totality of socializing experiences, students are developed into passive learners, unmotivated citizens and underperforming workers urged to buy things they don't need.

Ira Shore, Empowering Education, 1992. (Cited in Klein, M (2001) Solving Division Problems: The Construction of Implicit and Explicit Knowledge(s), in J. Allen (ed) Sociology of Education: Possibilities and Practice (2nd ed). Katoomba, NSW: Social Science Press, pp.129-148)

National average hrs/week

11-15 16+

22% 27%

Diploma of Foundation Studies average hrs/week

9-16 17+

62% 24%

Table 1: Full time students in Paid Employment (2004)

Student Diversity

Table 2: Student days on Campus (2004)

Days per week 3 4 5

Student Days on Campus: National Average 16% 34% 39%

Student Days on Campus: Diploma 20% 46% 30%

Student Days with classes: Diploma 35% 46% 15%

Student Diversity

Student Diversity

Table 3: DoFS Cohort Completion Rates and Course Progress 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Aggregate YEAR

n % n % n % n % n % n %

Enrolled in DoFS Program 41 52 82 117 116 408 Attempted DoFS Program 39 - 50 - 76 - 107 - 109 - 381 - Completed DoFS 34 87 44 88 67 88 98 92 99 92 342 90 Graduated DoFS 12 35 30 68 35 52 61 62 60 61 199 52 DoFS Grads in MU Degrees 11 32 27 61 33 49 56 57 54 55 182 91 DoFS Graduates not at MU 1 3 3 7 2 3 5 5 6 6 17 9 DoFS in MU Degrees 30 88 37 84 61 91 80 82 79 80 287 84

Student Outcomes

Table 4: Average GPA in First Year Degree and DoFS Students 2000-2004

Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

ENTER Deg DA DG Deg DA DG Deg DA DG Deg DA DG Deg DA DG

Below 50 1.94 1.63 2.01 1.95 1.49 2.18 1.44 1.31 2.19 - 1.36 1.8 - 1.24 1.84

50 - 54.95 1.80 1.60 2.30 1.71 1.18 2.21 1.13 1.63 2.00 - 1.91 2.14 - 1.56 1.90

55 - 59.95 1.88 1.25 1.94 1.91 1.78 2.03 1.3 1.53 2.34 1.88 1.52 2.11 - 1.82 2.15

60 - 64.95 1.39 1.32 - 1.33 2.07 2.11 1.37 1.68 2.14 1.43 1.82 2.2 2.23 1.98 2.35

65 - 69.95 1.57 3.00 2.69 1.75 2.00 2.00 1.42 1.65 2.57 1.61 1.85 2.38 2.25 2.1 2.24

70 - 74.95 1.91 - - 1.91 2.00 2.00 1.79 - - 2.03 2.76 2.76 1.88 2.75 3.01

75 - 79.95 1.69 - - 2.11 - - 1.91 - - 2.07 0.25 - 2.28 - -

Student Outcomes

Table 5: Performance of DoFS and Mainstream Undergraduate Students

Total Student Cohort

(First-year Undergraduates)

Students who passed

Enter Score Pass Rate Result

Year Unit No DOFS

(mean ) M/S

(min) DoFS (%)

M/S (%)

DoFS (mean)

M/S (mean)

DFS1611 55.1 74.2 87 80 64.9 64.9 EDF1301 54.9 69.3 91 91 63.8 69.2 2000

EDF1302 54.7 69.3 82 96 60.7 60.1

DFS1611 53.9 72.5 86 82 63.5 67.0 EDF1301 55.1 74.2 96 93 75.5 80.5 2001

EDF1302 55.1 74.2 89 90 59.5 65.2

DFS1611 53.6 71.3 87 83 62.5 65.2 EDF1301 52.7 75.6 91 80 60.6 67.5 2002

EDF1302 53.4 75.6 81 94 62.6 67.1

DFS1611 55.6 75.5 87 88 65.0 65.6 EDF1301 56.1 75.4 83 92 59.1 66.7 2003

EDF1302 54.1 75.4 83 97 62.8 66.7

DFS1611 56.5 72.5 94 91 62.9 68.1 EDF1301 58.5 75.9 80 98 63.7 64.8 2004

EDF1302 58.4 75.9 69 87 60.0 66.7

Student Outcomes

Table 6: Comparison Progression Rates (SPU) - DoFS and Degree Students

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Students attempting DoFS 0.780 0.840 0.820 0.860 0.870 Campus Degree students – Commencing 0.771 0.815 0.810 0.815 0.854 Returning DoFS students in Degrees 0.941 0.897 0.768 0.799 Returning DoFS graduates in Degrees 0.991 0.956 0.891 0.871 Campus Degree students - Returning 0.846 0.844 0.853 0.855

Early Engagement

Student selection process“I danced around the living room in my pyjamas”

Orientation Week activities

Successful Engagement Strategies

Little ‘e’ and big ‘E’ engagement

Team teaching

[The teaching team] know your name, they know your learning style as well, like if you’re confident or not. I like the feeling that people know each other. I think it’s back to the networking. You’ve got this network of people that know you.


Delivery Techniques

Delivery Techniques

Being known & its benefits

[T]he classes we had and the support network, it made me more comfortable to be at uni and it was a smooth transition from school. And you sort of get opened up to this new world of knowledge and this new way of thinking and writing… I think that’s what gave me the confidence to then … go onto the other areas I’m really interested in.


Being available

Mutually supportive learning community

[T]hat whole community type network, we all bounced ideas off each other. I remember asking students in our first units let’s go and work on the essay together and like… in that first year it was just really easy to bounce ideas off each other and help each other out and work together…

Delivery TechniquesSuccessful Engagement Strategies

Delivery Techniques

Cooperative learning

[I]t wasn’t just about learning, if that makes sense, it was about learning … other things. It wasn’t rote learning or book learning; it was just learning sort of life skills in a university context. So that’s probably one of the best things, and meeting new people … from so many different Faculties… I think just the experience of everybody and the[ir] perspective[s]… you get sociology people with their views and the nurses with their views, just sort of incorporating all the views into one.


Passionate teaching

Oh it definitely got heated. Someone stands their point and someone else stands their point and that’s good because you can share the knowledge, you’re just throwing ideas around the room and that could relate back if you need to write an essay about that topic. [I] like the idea of being comfortable with the people around you and being able to speak your mind.

Delivery TechniquesSuccessful Engagement Strategies

Delivery techniques

E teaching


Program Scaffolding

Core Units Full year program Small size Student rather than curriculum focused Partnerships with student services providers Social engagement Program structure Time tabling Acknowledgement that university isn’t for everyone


Content Initiative

At Monash University’s Gippsland campus, the Arts Faculty offers a Diploma of Foundation Studies which enables rural and isolated students to access higher education. The program includes a subject called ‘Understanding University Learning’ which de-constructs some of the issues that typically mystify, including the construction and departmentalization of knowledge, the nature of university teachers and teaching, and so on.

Rosemary Clerehan (2003)Transition to Tertiary Education in the Arts and Humanities: Some academic initiatives from Australia, Arts and Humanities, Higher Education, 2(1), pp.72-89.


Content Initiative

DFS1611 Understanding University Learning Transition issues Study skills The nature of universities Critical thinking & Discourses Independent learning Graded tute attendance and preparation Additional (unfunded) class time


Unsuccessful Engagement Strategies

Size

Co-opted staff

Voluntary reading groups

Insensitive time tabling

Notion of a ‘one size fits all’ curriculum

Imposition of campus political imperatives

The politics of engagement

• Localised politics and policies of resource distribution

• Engagement is like beauty – we know it when we see it.

• Academic measures of engagement• Strategies need to be localised and

contextualised• Academic workload split & ‘teaching smarter’• Our most valuable contribution remains time

Strategies for Student Engagement: Reflections from the Coalface.

Documents

Transcript of Strategies for Student Engagement: Reflections from the Coalface.